Lost in Translation | | Cast : | Scarlett Johansson, Bill Murray, Giovanni Ribisi | | Director : | Sofia Coppola | | Studio : | Universal Studios | | Format : | Color, Widescreen, Dolby | | Released Date : | October 03, 2003 | | DVD Released Date : | February 08, 2005 | | Language : | English (Dubbed), English (Original Language), French (Original Language), French (Subtitled), Spanish (Subtitled) | | Audience Rating : | R (Restricted) | | | BUY THIS DVD FROM AMAZON |
Customer Reviews
| Rating |  | | Date | August 07, 2005 | | Summary | Hollywood does Art House | Content
 | This is what happens when Hollywood imitates an indie/art house cinematic effort. In that respect the film is so lucky, because it has an instant defense to all who criticize it: if you don't like this film, obviously you'd rather be watching "Dukes of Hazzard".
This film takes a formulaic Hollywood sensibility and gives it a languid, arty presentation. The slow, slow pace would be okay if it were used to probe into the depths of the character's personalities, but it doesn't--maybe because there's nothing to the characters. The girl lays around trying to figure out what she wants to do with her life, and the guy is having a mid-life crisis. Nothing much more than that gets revealed, but compared to all the cardboard supporting characters, the stars seem like real 3-D personalities.
The film does even worse with its "exploration" of life in a foreign culture. I checked out this film because one review praised it for its look at the problems of dealing with life in another culture. Since I've lived overseas for a number of years now, this sounded interesting. Instead, one gets a series of boilerplate yuks about strange foreign cultures: everyone speaks a bewildering language (imagine!), the interpreter translates 45 foreign words into 3 English words, the Japanese people are short, etc. etc. Look, the main characters of this movie are in Tokyo for a week or two and they seem completely alienated and devastated by it all--these people should definitely have stayed home!!
Another comment about the glacial speed of this movie: was it really necessary for the karaoke scene to go on for so long? You get the idea after the first song, that these are people in Tokyo amusing themselves with karaoke, that's what Japanese people do, after all (isn't it?). After the second song, you figure that the point has been even better made, but by the third song, when Bill Murray starts to launch into the Roxy Music tune, barely able to keep from slipping into his Saturday Night Live lounge-crooner mode, you have to wonder what the point is.
If you like slow films, check out something by Bergman or Tarkovsky instead. This one's just dull.
|
| Rating | | | Date | August 07, 2005 | | Summary | you have to have a brain to enjoy this | Content
| So, if you are one of those sheep that enjoys the mindless crappola that comes out every summer, you will not get it.
Actually, a lot of people don't get it, because they don't understand a movie about people.
They don't get anything that is character driven, or at the least, don't get characters that are not bigger than life good guys or bad guys.
Maybe one has to have been at a point in life at some time feeling out of place, lost, looking for something and not sure what, to be able to understand this.
Unfortunately, so many mindless sheep go through their lives in a consumerist haze of job, mall, couch, tanning salon, repeat, that they don't even know they are wandering aimlessly.
The 21 inch rims they bought made their year. |
| Rating | | | Date | August 04, 2005 | | Summary | A Superb Movie...That I Don't Recommend? | Content
| In case the title confuses some, I think this is one of the 10 best movies of 2003. However, I really have no idea who this movie is trying to reach out to, and I also don't know anybody who might like this film. I love it, but I guess the only way to keep this review fresh is to acknowledge and criticze the common remarks. Here are my two cents.
"This movie isn't about anything"
---Very true, but it's not trying to be. I know that's not a very appealing aspect, but for me that helps the movie. I believe that life has a purpose, but I also admit that life is not spelled out like it is in epics or Shakespeare...or 99% of the movies I've ever seen.
"This movie isn't funny."
---This movie isn't very funny. That, sadly, is one of its faults. I'm all for dry humor, but Bob Harris (played wonderfully by Bill Murray) is trying to limit his reputation as an actor, keeping things on the down-low. Well, writer-director Sofia Coppola should've rethought that approach, because you can't aim for something with your characters and then expect the audience to react the exact opposite. In other words, you can't make Bill Murray funny by making him desperately trying to be unfunny. Nevertheless, I smiled and nodded at the movie's undeniable charm.
"Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson give the best performances of their career."
---Johansson was equally good in "Girl With A Pearl Earring," but she's perfect here. She's young, but intelligent. She's lonely, but makes efforts to cope with that. She's confused, but she learns that there's plenty of time left in her life. As far as Murray goes, I prefer his comedic turns in "Rushmore" and "Groundhog Day," but I will say that he perfectly captures the character of Bob Harris, and acheives what he tries to accomplish with this role. Roger Ebert said it best "Bill Murray is becoming the master of minimalist expressions."
"Sofia Coppola makes up for the bad acting in 'The Godfather: Part III'."
---I, for one, thought she was "OKAY" in that movie, but who cares? She's behind the camera, and to me, although "Lost In Translation" was not one of the 5 best movies of the year, she would've been my pick for the Best Director Oscar. She did not go for an epic or grandiose feel. She acheived what very movies do for me...I felt like I was actually there in the world of the characters. I felt what Charlotte and Bob felt...which is a good thing and a bad thing. When they were having fun, so was I. When they were bored, Coppola captured that a little too well in a couple of scenes. When Bob and Charlotte don't want to leave each, I didn't want the movie to end.
"I'm glad that Bob and Charlotte don't have a passionate relationship, but an actual bond."
---I don't know who said it first or best, but I am in total agreement. The last thing this movie needed was a sex scene.
"The supporting characters are either underused, or unnecessary."
---This is one of those points where I understand the intention (they're supposed to be quirky and add flavor to the oddities of the Japanese culture), but again, it works too well. To develop them would've hurt the movie, but the way they are isn't completely satisfactory. This is a lesser-of-two-evils debate.
"This movie was way too over-praised."
---I don't believe "Lost In Translation" is a masterpiece, but it is an excellent movie. Even if this movie isn't entertaining to everybody (nobody I know likes this movie!), can anyone deny that this movie is something unique? Can't even the un-impressed audiences admit that this movie tried to go for an emotional response that few movies have attempted? One thing I believe that nobody can deny about "Lost In Translation" is this: There has never been a more honest or believable film ever. Because there is no conventional plot structure or character development, but instead pure experience and emotion...you will never see a more genuine motion picture.
I wish I could recommend this movie to people, and it saddens me that most don't enjoy it. However, this movie gave me such a strong reaction, that I had to put it in words.
I love this movie, but it's an excellent film that somehow is "Not Recommended." Definitely check it out BEFORE you buy it! |
| Rating | | | Date | July 20, 2005 | | Summary | Possibilities Squandered | Content
| I saw this when i first came out.There was so much that could have been done comedically with the premise of this,without stooping to lowbrow slapstick (though that has it's place too). The same story could have been told in America. I thought the setting of Tokyo was,with a couple of exceptions,wasted.
I found it very difficult to get to the ending,,and I'm perfectly capable of getting through a movie where stuff doesn't get "blowed up real good" every two minutes.
But,i've always been one to make myself sit through a movie, and I'm still glad I sat through it, because my prediction of "we're going to see a lot more of Scarlet Johansen" appears to be coming true. |
| Rating | | | Date | July 11, 2005 | | Summary | A film for the sensitive, artistic or lost | Content
| This film is about the paradoxical loneliness and emptiness in a world that is burgeoning with people.
And amidst this, the strange and unexpected connections between people. It shows that the human soul never ceases to be lonely, even when one is married with children. It never ceases seeking connections, other souls to travel this journey with.
To me, Lost in Translation is also about the magic of travel. When you are alone in a foreign land, you never know when you will fall in love with a stranger, whom you might spend a few hours or a few days with, and quite probably never meet again -- but the memory lingers in your mind forever.
Very little actually happens in this film in terms of events, so if you need lots of events to enjoy a film, this is not for you. but if you are sensitive to body language, ambience, and subtle expressions, you'll love the volumes that Murray and Johansson speak without saying much - or sometimes, without saying anything at all. People around them may be continuously speaking Japanese, and they barely understand a word. but between them, they understand each other perfectly even when they say nothing... a glance, a smile... and there's magic. The magic of being Lost in Translation, together.
E-mail: elias_stars @ yahoo.com |
|
